AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

A question of flawed thinking

22nd October 2009
Page 16
Page 16, 22nd October 2009 — A question of flawed thinking
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

I WAS INTERESTED to read the article concerning safety features on the Royal Mail vehicle in CM (1 October).

I couldn't help but be drawn to the photo showing. what I presume s, the Lane Departure Warning System (pictured) sensor on the Jashboard's top surface.

My understanding of the law Nould suggest that far from being safety feature, it would, in fact, ittract an immediate prohibition )ccause it is within the wiper sweep, and clearly interferes with a driver's forward vision.

Its surprising that all this technology and thinking ends up with such a basic flaw. Certainly, from past experience, I would expect any of my vehicles with equipment mounted in this way to receive a prohibition.

David Seaton Managing director Freight Express Ed's note: Tony Pain, marketing director at DAF Trucks, responds: "Regarding the Lane Departure Warning sensor, this question has been raised before. We checked with VOSA, which confirms that its fitment doesn't contravene the visibility regulations. Indeed, most manufacturers' systems are similar to ours in their mountings, and I would refer anyone who is interested in this matter to the current VOSA 'Tester's Instruction Mamialt Moreover, the instruction in Testing Standards Enquiry IM 23 HGV/PSV ref 23/17, issued to heavy goods vehicle test station staff in January 2005, doesn't refer directly to the LDW sensor, but the examples shown are similar to that fitted in the Royal Mail Safety Concept Vehicle. I trust this clarifies the situation."

Tags


comments powered by Disqus